On the Couch with Newt and Nancy

Nancy Pelosi keeps hinting that she knows something that will derail Newt Gingrich’s Presidential run. I doubt she knows anything of any substance, but if she does, I’d expect it to become known in October. That would be the worst possible timing if Gingrich were to become the nominee.

As for Newt, a picture says a thousand words. This one speaks volumes.

With global warming, is heating assistance necessary?

Barack Obama

Democrats are criticizing Barack Obama for cutting money for heating assistance in half. In the President’s defense, is this money really necessary? After all, according to them, global warming is gradually raising the temperature of the Earth. If this trend continues, as many liberals say it will, we would hardly need to have the same level of heating assistance.

Of course, many liberals would rightly point out that we have faced one of the coldest winters in recent history. I wouldn’t disagree with this point, but it is going to warm up a lot, isn’t it?

New fuel efficiency standards are important for national security

A very rare thing happened this week: Barack Obama did something I agree with. The administration raised fuel efficiency standards on automobiles and SUV’s to an average of 35.5 miles per gallon. I know that many fellow conservatives are up in arms about this decision, but I think it’s a good decision which is long overdue.

There are already complaints about the new regulation relating to the increased cost of new automobiles and the reluctance to do anything to improve global warming, since many find the science inconclusive. As for the cost, it could be substantial. New car prices may rise up to $1,000. That’s certainly nothing to sneeze at, but this extra cost will certainly pay for itself in reduced fuel costs. Besides, once the car companies begin making more fuel efficient cars on a large scale, the economies of scale will likely kick in and bring this upfront increase down. » read more

Socialism, climate change, and hypocrisy

Hugo Chavez spoke at the climate summit in Copenhagen and was greeted by loud applause. Here is an excerpt from his speech, which sums up his over all message:

We could say that there is a ghost lurking. To paraphrase Karl Marx there is a ghost running through the streets of Copenhagen. And I think that ghost is silent, somewhere in this room, amongst us. Coming through the corridors and underneath. And that ghost is a terrible ghost and nobody wants to name him or her. It’s capitalism. Capitalism is that ghost. Nobody I don’t think wants to name it. Capitalism. I’ve also been struck by some of the signs outside this conference. One sign in particular that reads, “Don’t change the climate … change the system!” I particularly liked that one and would add to that by saying that by changing the system, we could save the planet. The destructive model of capitalism is eradicating life.

» read more

Copenhagen: Why not have a teleconference?

Dennis Miller makes an excellent point in this video. If the individuals attending the climate summit in Copenhagen really cared about global warming, why wouldn’t they make it a teleconference? Cancel the private jets, limos, and other energy sapping activities. Of course, they would lose their vacation and glitzy surroundings, but at least the whole world wouldn’t have to know that they are hypocrites.

If the organizers of the summit decide to take this advice and have a teleconference next time, it will be in good hands. Before he was a friend of the global warming industry, Al Gore was the self-proclaimed creator of the internet. Who better to handle such a daunting task?

The global warming cult silences the media

Watching how climate researchers have handled themselves during climategate has made me reflect on my own scientific training. One way in which science is advanced is buying questioning what was done before. Such questions shouldn’t be taken personally. They should be seen as an attempt to find “the truth” and further the field of study. Any disagreements can be refuted by citing past research, or by conducting further studies. Unfortunately, professor Stephen Schneider, a climate researcher at Stanford, doesn’t seem to have this basic understanding.

While speaking at a press conference at the climate summit in Copenhagen, a film-maker asked him some questions he wasn’t comfortable answering. The proper thing to do would have been to answer his questions, seeing as though it was a press conference, then use scientific findings to support his claims. Instead of taking this scholarly high road, Professor Schneider’s associates had armed U.N. guards remove the questioner from the premises and ordered his cameraman to stop filming. Here is the exchange caught on tape: » read more

Christmas and global warming

I have to say that I’m ambivalent about global warming. Intuitively, it seems to make sense, but why the cliimategate cover-ups? Also, wasn’t the next ice age being heralded a few decaes ago? If those weren’t enough to make you question global warming, we have some people espousing ideas that are just insane.

Two of my favorites appeared this week. The first suggests moving to a global policy of allowing couples to have just one child. Sure, you may love your kids, but their birth is causing the Earth to warm. At some point, they will surely be the death of us! Now, there might be two feet of snow outside your house, but trust them: The little tikes are warming the planet. » read more

This shouldn’t be news…

Senator John Kerry will Be flying to the global warming summit in Copenhagen on a commercial flight. So what? It’s certainly not a big deal. That’s true, but when you consider how many people there will be taking private jets, it certainly deserves some mention in order to contrast him with the environmental hypocrites.

Do you think John will point this sort of thing out to fellow attendees once he gets there? I wouldn’t count on it.

Hypocrisy in Copenhagen

Top decision makers are in Copenhagen at the climate summit to discuss climate change. Besides the attendees, environmentalists from all over the world will be keeping a close eye on what happens. While no ground-breaking decisions are expected to be made, this summit is undoubtedly at the center of most environmentalists’ attention.

As these scientists, protesters, and interested parties are watching, I hope they are also on the lookout for hypocrisy. A lot of people claim to care about global warming and want to others to make changes in their lifestyles, but they are reluctant to make these changes in their own life. The saying, “do as I say, not as I do” comes to mind. » read more

Climategate makes me wonder: What happened to the ice age?

Global warming or an impending ice age? Scientists have flip-flopped over the last few decades.

Is global warming real? I’m not sure any more. If you asked me a year or two ago, I would have tended to agree that there was something to it. The facts didn’t seem to be fully understood, but intuitively, it seemed to be something that deserved careful consideration. Of course, the research and its interpretation seemed to be hijacked by the political left, which put findings on a pedestal and would shout down anyone who questioned the results. If you know anything about science, you know how important it is to have findings constantly questioned through empirical research, then evaluated by the larger scientific community.

Many climatologists seem more inclined to jump on the global warming than take time to question findings and risk being ostracized by their colleagues and the political left. In light of climategate, which showed that high-level researches might have suppressed data and altered findings, a need to reexamine the validity of these studies is necessary. If history is any guide, it’s better to start this process sooner than later. If you don’t believe me, just look at the history of climate research. In the 1970′s the scientific community overwhelmingly supported the idea that the Earth was cooling, and that another ice age was approaching.

Climate researchers will tell you that you need to look at the long-term data when studying climate change, not just the last few years. If that’s the case, then how can two groups of distinguished scientists come up with such different results in a historically short period of time? The fact that there is disagreement doesn’t end the argument, since disagreement exists in many areas of science. The disturbing aspect is the group-think which characterizes a great deal of climate research.

Is global warming real? Is the Earth getting warmer? It’s certainly possible, and I wouldn’t be shocked if it were true. The problem is that we have found out recently that research was corrupted at a very high level. I would have more faith in the findings if dissenting voices weren’t silenced, findings were reevaluated objectively, and those responsible for doctoring data were ostracized by the scientific community and removed from their positions. Only then can we hope to discover some semblance of truth.

Barabara Boxer is comfortable with lies

As you probably know, someone hacked into a server at the University of East Anglia and stole e-mails which call some global warming research into question. The e-mails were obviously obtained illegally, and a crime was committed. With that said, these e-mails have exposed a pattern of deception which calls a great deal of climate change research into question.

At times, climate change supporters seem less like a group of academics and more like a cult. If research was in fact being tampered with, this has huge policy implications. You would think that our elected officials would want to know the truth, but that’s not the case. California Senator Barbara Boxer doesn’t seem to mind that she might have been duped by scientists. At least, that’s what she seems to be saying: » read more

Senator Inhofe talks about “Climategate”

Here is the audio from Senator Inhofe’s interview on Washington Times America’s Morning Show.

I’ve always had a problem with the defensive nature of those who study global warming. There seems to be a reluctance to encourage further debate, and a rush to demonize anyone who questions the findings. No matter how you stand on global warming, questioning research is a healthy part of the scientific process which should be encouraged, not stopped in its tracks. Maybe there is nothing to “Climategate,” but it should be investigated.

Global warming leads to increased prostitution and crazy theories

I just read a very strange article I wanted to share. It seems that global warming is leading more women in the Phillipines to become prostitutes. Yes, you read correctly!

The article states that 92 million people live in the Phillipines, and the population is expected to exceed 140 million in the next 40 years. Most of these people, approximately 60%, live near the coast. They are depleting the nations resources due to their population growth, which is causing more women to move from fishing to prostitution. I’m not sure if it’s me, but I think I’m missing something. » read more